Direct Legislation by the Citizenship through the Initiative and Referendum | Page 7

To prevent
the measure from becoming law, the petition must receive the legally
attested signatures of at least 3,500 citizens--about one in six of the
cantonal vote--within thirty days after the publication of the proposed
measure. After this period--known as "the first delay"--the referendary
vote, if the petition has been successful, must take place within forty
days--"the second delay."
The power of declaring measures to be "of urgence" lies with the Grand
Council, the body passing the measures. Small wonder, then, that in its
eyes many bills are of too much and too immediate importance to go to
the people. "The habit," protested Grand Councilor M. Putet, on one
occasion, "tends more and more to introduce itself here of decreeing
urgence unnecessarily, thus taking away from the Referendum
expenses which have nothing of urgence. This is contrary to the spirit
of the constitutional law. Public necessity alone can authorize the
Grand Council to take away any of its acts from the public control."
Another defect in the optional Referendum is that it can be transformed
into a partisan weapon--politicians being ready, in Geneva, as in San
Francisco, to take advantage of the law for party purposes. For example,
the representatives of a minority party, seeking a concession from a
majority which has just passed a bill, will threaten, if their demands are
not granted, to agitate for the Referendum on the bill; this, though the
minority itself may favor the measure, some of its members, perhaps,
having voted for it. As the majority may be uncertain of the outcome of
a struggle at the polls, it will probably be inclined to make peace on the
terms dictated by the minority.
But the most serious objections to the optional form arise in connection
with the petitioning. Easy though it be for a rich and strong party to
bear the expense of printing, mailing, and distributing petitions and
circulars, in case of opposition from the poorer classes the cost may
prove an insurmountable obstacle. Especially is it difficult to get up a
petition after several successive appeals coming close together, the
constant agitation growing tiresome as well as financially burdensome.

Hence, measures have sometimes become law simply because the
people have not had time to recover from the prolonged agitation in
connection with preceding propositions. Besides, each measure
submitted to the optional Referendum brings with it two separate waves
of popular discussion--one on the petition and one on the subsequent
vote. On this point ex-President Numa Droz has said: "The agitation
which takes place while collecting the necessary signatures, nearly
always attended with strong feeling, diverts the mind from the object of
the law, perverts in advance public opinion, and, not permitting later
the calm discussion of the measure proposed, establishes an almost
irresistible current toward rejection." Finally, a fact as notorious in
Switzerland as vote-buying in America, a large number of citizens who
are hostile to a proposed law may fear to record an adverse opinion by
signing a Referendum list. Their signatures may be seen and the
unveiling of their sentiments imperil their means of livelihood.
Zurich furnishes the example of the cantons having the obligatory
Referendum. There the law provides: 1. That all laws, decrees, and
changes in the constitution must be submitted to the people. 2. That all
decisions of the Grand Council on existing law must be voted on. 3.
That the Grand Council may submit decisions which it itself proposes
to make, and that, besides the voting on the whole law, the Council
may ask a vote on a special point. The Grand Council cannot put in
force provisionally any law or decree. The propositions must be sent to
the voters at least thirty days before voting. The regular referendary
ballotings take place twice a year, spring and autumn, but in urgent
cases the Grand Council may call for a special election. The law in this
canton assists the lawmakers--the voters--in their task; when a citizen is
casting his own vote he may also deposit that of one or two relatives
and friends, upon presenting their electoral card or a certificate of
authorization.
In effect, the obligatory Referendum makes of the entire citizenship a
deliberative body in perpetual session--this end being accomplished in
Zurich in the face of every form of opposing argument. Formerly, its
adversaries made much of the fact that it was ever calling the voters to
the urns; but this is now avoided by the semi-annual elections. It was

once feared that party tickets would be voted without regard to the
merits of the various measures submitted; but it has been proved
beyond doubt that the fate of one proposition has no effect whatever on
that of another decided at the same time. Zurich has pronounced on
ninety-one laws in twenty-eight elections, the votes indicating